@K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia @Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen please note that there were 11 infections in the Beijing 2004 leaks, not 8.

The 8 you are mentioning are for the main chain of infection with 3 levels from one primary case in April.
But there were 3 more primary cases for a total of 11 cases.

@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia All were linked to the heavily contaminated CDC P3 lab (the top P3 in China at the time).

The cases are typically separated between:

- The February ones (Cui and Ren) which seem to have been covered up by the CDC Institute of Virology. Also we only have pseudonyms for these 2.
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia - The April ones-9 infections (1+8, officially the 'Beijing-Anhui Apr-2004 breakout'.

The official Chinese report only focussed on the April infections - keeping very quiet about the February ones. Here is the main April chain of infection.

Here is are the 9 from Apr 2004:
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia And here are the 9 people infected in Apr 2004:
(4-22 in the title -> April chain with alarm raised on the 22nd):
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia The WHO eventually correctly mentioned 11 cases:
https://t.co/a1HvuT0C8z
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia We know about the initial 2 Feb 2004 simply because of a report in the Chinese press at the time (Caijing).

Otherwise China kept very quiet about them, and on purpose did not include them in its investigation with the WHO (never fully released).

See https://t.co/4uK6xnWu9G
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia Nor did China ever SARS mention that the sample fridge had been moved *outside* of the lab as it was at 2 or 3 times capacity being full on students unqualified in biosafety.
We learnt that via Caijin and other mainland newspapers citing witnesses.
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia Some Chinese paper also mentioned 11 cases (paper impossible to access, I asked the authors in vain):
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia Anyway going back to the silence about the 2 primary cases in Feb 2004, this was due to the fact that the Chinese authorities had visited that lab in January 2004 (following the Singapore/Taiwan SARS leak) and ordered a strengthening of biosafety measures.

Nothing happened.
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia The CDC P3 management team (Hong Tao, Dong Xioping, Wong Jianwei) just ignored them.

So the government would have looked very bad if the Feb 2004 cases had been publicised, since they were ignored and they did not follow up.
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia Anyway, the best part of all is that Dong Xioaping - who was officially sanctioned at the time for his role in the Beijing lab leaks - was #2 on the Chinese side of the Feb 2020 WHO mission. Only in China...

@K_G_Andersen @PeterDaszak prove me wrong on any of the points I made..
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia @PeterDaszak Even the recent @StateDept factsheet about the WIV got it wrong and mentioned only 9 cases during the leak.

A good example of the value for China of obfuscating the truth.

ttps://2017-2021.state.gov/fact-sheet-activity-at-the-wuhan-institute-of-virology//index.html

More from World

MISREPRESENTED CONTEXT

1. I am indeed disgusted with attempts to misrepresent and take out of context what I wrote on my blog yesterday.


2. Those who did that highlighted only one part of paragraph 12 which read: “Muslims have a right to be angry and to kill millions of French people for the massacres of the past.”

3. They stopped there and implied that I am promoting the massacre of the French.

4.If they had read d posting in its entirety & especially the subsequent sentence which read: “But by & large the Muslims hv not applied the “eye for an eye” law. Muslims don’t. The French shouldn’t. Instead the French should teach their people to respect other people’s feelings

5. Because of the spin and out of context presentation by those that picked up my posting, reports were made against me and I am accused of promoting violence etc… on Facebook and Twitter.

You May Also Like

Rig Ved 1.36.7

To do a Namaskaar or bow before someone means that you are humble or without pride and ego. This means that we politely bow before you since you are better than me. Pranipaat(प्राणीपात) also means the same that we respect you without any vanity.

1/9


Surrendering False pride is Namaskaar. Even in devotion or bhakti we say the same thing. We want to convey to Ishwar that we have nothing to offer but we leave all our pride and offer you ourselves without any pride in our body. You destroy all our evil karma.

2/9

We bow before you so that you assimilate us and make us that capable. Destruction of our evils and surrender is Namaskaar. Therefore we pray same thing before and after any big rituals.

3/9

तं घे॑मि॒त्था न॑म॒स्विन॒ उप॑ स्व॒राज॑मासते ।
होत्रा॑भिर॒ग्निं मनु॑षः॒ समिं॑धते तिति॒र्वांसो॒ अति॒ स्रिधः॑॥

Translation :

नमस्विनः - To bow.

स्वराजम् - Self illuminating.

तम् - His.

घ ईम् - Yours.

इत्था - This way.

उप - Upaasana.

आसते - To do.

स्त्रिधः - For enemies.

4/9

अति तितिर्वांसः - To defeat fast.

मनुषः - Yajman.

होत्राभिः - In seven numbers.

अग्निम् - Agnidev.

समिन्धते - Illuminated on all sides.

Explanation : Yajmans bow(do Namaskaar) before self illuminating Agnidev by making the offerings of Havi.

5/9